• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Featured Neanderthals, Dinosaurs?

Discussion in 'Creation & Theistic Evolution' started by ilovejcsog, Aug 12, 2019.

  1. Ronald

    Ronald Exhortations Supporter

    +844
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    If the Word is for man, it is to man, all of us. We can go round and round with this and point out specific texts like Deuteronomy or Leviticus that arent applicable to Christians, but over all, we can gain from all. I was saved reading the New Testament, didn't delve into the Old Testament right away and then only portions and gradually.
     
  2. JacksBratt

    JacksBratt Searching for Truth

    +3,429
    Canada
    Protestant
    Married
    No, God did not write the bible in English.. but we certainly cling to the gospel message in our translations with white knuckle grip..don't we.. Then we toss out the simple written text that describes six literal days....

    Sorry, a lot of speculation on your part.."Possibly it's meaning maybe totally different"? Really? So Jesus said:

    John 5:45–47, “Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; there is one who accuses you—Moses, in whom you trust. For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?”

    and:

    Exodus 31:17 Exodus 20:11



    "For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.

    and:




    "It is a sign between Me and the sons of Israel forever; for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, but on the seventh day He ceased from labor, and was refreshed."



    So..."there was evening, there was morning.. the first thousand years"... LOL that's too funny.
     
  3. charsan

    charsan Charismatic Episcopal Church

    347
    +322
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    While the Bible is for us, on that I agree, the books contained within the Bible are not written specifically to any 21st century man. Now if you want a further discussion start a new topic because this is not the topic of the OP and I will respond no further to any off topic post in this thread.
     
  4. RTP76

    RTP76 New Member

    24
    +10
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    @JacksBratt
    Hi JacksBratt! I too believe the word of God is ultimately true regarding creation--sure not every detail of creation is given (so there certainly is joy to be found in discovering aspects of our creation that is not revealed in scripture), but these additional truths should not give rise to negating what is clearly written.

    It is often asked: Were the 'days' of creation actual [ordinary] days?
    Genesis indicates so, but this idea of normal/typical days is also corroborated elsewhere in scripture:
    Exodus 20:11
    Leviticus 23:3
    Deuteronomy 5:13
    Deuteronomy 16:8

    Further, Jesus is quoted in the NT making direct references to the creation account, as it is written:
    Mark 10:6
    Mark 13:19
    Luke 11:50-51
    Luke 13:14 (interesting here is that the synagogue official cites working for six days (and that is when healing should be... not on the sabbath is the argument)... so it, again, is clear that days were understood to be ordinary-length days). Never does Jesus make a reference to people/events in the creation account in such a way where it warrants a re-interpretation of days or viewing the people and events as being merely symbolic.

    There are, of course, many other references to the creation account by both NT and OT authors - all pointing to Genesis as being a historical, narrative account, given by God, and written down [most likely] by Moses. The Bible is clear on this, and arguments against really are arguments from silence as far as scripture is concerned... they arise from extra-biblical sources where conclusions from indirect observations are made and viewed as more authoritative than scripture.

    God bless -
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • List
  5. ChristianForCats

    ChristianForCats God Seeker

    +580
    United States
    Protestant
    Single
    US-Democrat
    The Biblical text does not tell us God created everything inv six literal days. If it did, nothing He created - rocks, seas, plants, animals, and microscopic things - would have existed 4.6 billion-6 million years ago. I don't know how you can say this and still deny it is possible for what scientists discovered to be proof the Creation did not not happen in six literal days. Why don't you go look up articles about evolution?

    If you tihnk it is possible for the Creation to happen in six literal days, there is no reason to doubt it could have been created in a much longer time. No, it is not any speculation on my part because I KNOW THE FACTS.

    If you still can't understand it, you just want to be ignorant.
     
  6. ChristianForCats

    ChristianForCats God Seeker

    +580
    United States
    Protestant
    Single
    US-Democrat
    I am convinced most people on CF have this idea that just because the Bible does not mention millions of years before Adam, a day can't mean that. The truth is evolution was simply not mentioned in it, which is totally different from saying it never happend. If evolution never happened, the Earth never would have a climate change or anything that was created after "the sixth day" and no original species would be extinct today. We would not be homo sapiens. Just look around you. Listen to the animals and rain. Smell plants. Go the beach and forest. What you will see are many objects that existed much longer than 6 days before Adam did.
     
  7. ilovejcsog

    ilovejcsog The way....

    +720
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Single
    Since Gods day can be a thousand years how do you know that after the first day of creation it took more than 24 hrs to 999years to create the second creation, etc?
    Just to add more confusion.
     
  8. joshua 1 9

    joshua 1 9 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,695
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    We know that humans did not exist along with the dinosaurs. That does not mean the human like footprints are a fake. They are just of unknown origin.
     
  9. ChristianForCats

    ChristianForCats God Seeker

    +580
    United States
    Protestant
    Single
    US-Democrat
    The fake stuff is any story about humans and dinosaurs living at the same time. Dinosaurs lived 200-65 million years ago.
     
  10. joshua 1 9

    joshua 1 9 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,695
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    We are not talking about the "story" or the explanation for the evidence. WE are just talking about the evidence we have. Right how you have nothing to substantiate your hypotheses that the evidence is "fake".
     
  11. ChristianForCats

    ChristianForCats God Seeker

    +580
    United States
    Protestant
    Single
    US-Democrat
    I said the story is fake because evidence disproves it. Evidence certainly is there that dinosaurs died long before the first humans existed.
     
  12. joshua 1 9

    joshua 1 9 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,695
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    Yes we know that humans were not alive at this time. But we still have human looking foot prints. That is why I mentioned one belief that the footprints belonged to angels.

    You want to claim they are fake, that should be very easy to prove. Remember the James Ossuary? It was shown that the questionable inscription was recent. If the footprints were fake then that is what the evidence would show. Even 50 years of petunia is pretty conclusive. If someone had carved those human footprints into the rock then the patina would be very different on the human prints compared to the dinosaur prints. It would not look the same at all. My son did that once. He is very good at finding fossils. One day he found a very old fossil and before I know it he was cleaning it up and remove a substantial amount of the petunia, which in this case was iron based that very much dated the item we had. I stopped him from removing the petunia and he had no idea that he should not be cleaning the item up like that.

    People do have different opinions about how much to clean an antique. I did renovation and restoration work for many years so I am an expert on this. I have my own way or doing restoration and it is almost an art. To leave enough of the petunia to show the age of the item, but to clean it up to bring out it's natural beauty. I have one objective to sell the item for more money then what I bought it for. There is value in the age but there is also value when the item appeals to the human eye.
     
  13. The Righterzpen

    The Righterzpen Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm

    +617
    United States
    Reformed
    Widowed
    I think you are right here in the sense of "sons of God" being Godly men; but I don't think Godly men were just confined to the "biological line of Seth" (totally excluding any of Cain's biological decedents). Kind of like the passage: "They are not all Israel who are of Israel..." and neither are the children of the flesh the children of promise but those who are called are the seed of Abraham. (I know I'm verse mashing here.) But I think that fits in more with the principle of God not being a respecter of persons.

    Now if you were to say Seth's line is symbolic of Godly men; that I would go with!
     
  14. The Righterzpen

    The Righterzpen Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm

    +617
    United States
    Reformed
    Widowed
    Interesting article. I've read in other literature that they've found bones in coal seams (both human and "other") but I don't recall ever reading that particular story. That may have been the source material that the other article I read had gotten their information from; but I don't know, because it was more of a generalized article questioning the age of coal, oil and how these fossil fuels are actually formed.

    Good article though.
     
  15. ChristianForCats

    ChristianForCats God Seeker

    +580
    United States
    Protestant
    Single
    US-Democrat
    Honestly I don't care about the footprints being close to dinosaur fossils. Their location only matters if the archaeologists studying them can demonstrate humans walked in the region and saw the fossils there.
     
  16. The Righterzpen

    The Righterzpen Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm

    +617
    United States
    Reformed
    Widowed
    Gradualism and catastrophic theory are valid depending on the evidence being looked at.

    compare the appearance of these rocks:

    water erosion.jpeg
    scenic-view-of-waterfall-733268099-59639a505f9b583f180f2b3d.jpg
    clearly - water erosion

    Now look at the difference between the top and bottom of this rock:

    4th-ch6l3andch7weatheringerosion2-2-141024195219-conversion-gate01-thumbnail-4.jpg
    You can see a distinct difference between the smoothed bottom and the ragged top.

    Now look at the Grand Canyon: This is not water erosion; this is a gorge ripped in the earth is what it is.

    gramd canyon.jpg
    Now here's an example showing both the river and the craggy rock:

    Look; you can see the difference! The river bed, where the rock is smoothed is clearly water erosion; the rock above it though is not. It's an example of where sedimentary rock was pulled apart by earthquakes and obviously water takes the path of least resistance and this is why there's a river in the bottom of the canyon.

    The-Grand-Canyon 2.png

    Now consider these pictures as comparison: This is the "Little Colorado River Gorge". It's the "feeder" of the Grand Canyon:

    Note also; it's in the same rock strata! The rock that makes up the Grand Canyon is no different than the rock that makes up the Little Colorado River Gorge.

    colorado river gorge.jpeg

    Clearly; it's a crack in the ground!

    little coloardo river gorge 1.jpeg

    A crack that just keeps getting wider.

    colorado river gorge 3.jpeg
    And wider......

    Folks, this is not water erosion. An earth quake did this!
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2019
  17. The Righterzpen

    The Righterzpen Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm

    +617
    United States
    Reformed
    Widowed
    This thread is about origins. Where did things come from? Where do they fit in the time line.

    In order for this hypothesis to be true; all sorts of laws God established would have to be violated and violated by God Himself!

    We know one species does not arise from others. Humans did not come from monkeys. All life on this planet did not evolve from some undefined primordial "goo".

    Scripture says God made everything after its own kind. Angels and men are not the same "kind". If you can't cross dogs and cats, why would you think you could cross humans and angels?

    Scripture also says that angels don't marry or are given in marriage. Jesus says marriage is for the children of this world because death reigns. We also know that angels don't die in the same sense as carbon based life does. The lifespan of angels is from the point they were created until judgement day. Because they don't suffer death in the same way carbon based life does, thus eliminates the need to reproduce. And if a certain form of entity does not reproduce; there'd be no reason for God to give (them) organs to that end.

    Angels are also fundamentally different in nature than carbon based life. Thus angels can not create life; only God can do that. Now would God violate the rules that govern His own creation in producing some sort of angelic / human hybrid life form? Does that really make sense?

    The only combination Spirit / carbon based life form that ever existed was Jesus Christ. (Who, by the way never reproduced although he was obviously capable of doing so!) So if the only combination Spirit / human life form who was capable of reproducing was restrained from doing so despite the desire to follow the command that said "be fruitful and multiply"; why on earth would anyone ever conclude that God would not only create genitals for entities who could never use them and allow them to violate His own principles (mind you a place He Him/himself wouldn't even go) and allow them to do something only He has the power and authority to do - which is create life.

    Think of the implication of that belief.
     
  18. Neogaia777

    Neogaia777 Apprentice Supporter

    +3,488
    Non-Denom
    Celibate
    I'm saying that if He did create it in a literal six days, which I will not argue He is capable of doing, then why did He do such with the appearance of millions even billions of years...?

    It is pretty certainly evident by the evidence that it is millions, to some few billions of years old... And if He did create it in a literal six days, then He also created to deceptively appear millions to billions of years old, or to have happened over millions to billions of years, which my God does not do... He does not deceive or lie, so it must be our interpretations and assumptions that it was done in six literal days, or even 6000 years, that are "wrong" is all...

    When He says that one of His days "is as a thousand years", I do not think He meant it literally... but meant it to convey that one of His days is "very, very, very long", beyond comprehension to the ancients of those days back then...

    And what is an "evening and a morning" to God anyway, I mean he does not count his days by the light and the dark of the way we do with the way the earth turns and revolves around the sun and has light and dark because of it, etc...

    It must mean an era or epoch or an age...

    God Bless!
     
  19. Neogaia777

    Neogaia777 Apprentice Supporter

    +3,488
    Non-Denom
    Celibate
    The way God see's it, and the way we will look back on it, yes, it will be and "insignificant blip" compared to the vast stretches of cosmic time...

    And is why it is not even mentioned in Genesis 1 to 2:4... Which is the summary of an entire creation from the beginning to and ending of one... Covers billions, possibly even trillions of years...

    God Bless!
     
  20. The Righterzpen

    The Righterzpen Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm

    +617
    United States
    Reformed
    Widowed
    @Neogaia777 - why is my post #296 "funny"?

    The problem you have with "6 eras" as opposed to "6 literal days" is that in order for evolution to be true; there has to be death. The Scripture is very clear that death did not exist until Adam and Eve transgressed.

    Now why does it "appear" to be millions of years to you and not others? Would that not be a matter of perception and not an indisputable fact? You are assuming upon everyone else; God and also yourself that you can not be deceived by a belief system that you have bought into.

    Again, we are back to people's personal world views and what they choose to believe!
     
Loading...